View Full Version : Four games.

10-17-2006, 11:38 AM
Some of you are going to hate this thread...Call it second guessing. That's fine. Just skip over it.

Four games.

That's what it would have taken to put this team over the cardinals and into the playoffs.

Lots of moves to be critical of, but how many of them would have accounted for four games?

The trade? That's a big one. Would the trade have made four games up?

Keeping Dave Williams on the 40 man roster letting him heal and giving him a couple of late season starts?

Not cutting Josh Hancock to prove a point. Talk abut shooting yourself in the foot. In retrospect 70 league average innings out of somebody in this bullpen might have been huge.

Homer. Back in July they could have brought Homer up and givin him 30 or so innings. Yeah, you're screwin with your best prospect, but the prize would have been to get into the playoffs.

Resting Dunn. If Adam Dunn had taken some rest earlier in the season is it possible that he would not have pulled his vanishing act at the end of the year?

Those are the ones that come to mind. The two big ones that I think probably do make up 4 games would have been the trade and Hancock. Of course, in all liklihood if they had Hancock around, he would have started the season off the 40 man roster and they would not have had him on the staff till it was too late.

10-17-2006, 11:57 AM
I hate to even discuss The Trade again but, when you consider how brutally awful Majewski was and how much it handicapped our offense, that may be your 4 wins right there.

Dunn ... what else can be said. Discussing Dunn and The Trade always opens up a Pandora's Box. Two of the most intractable subjects in recent Reds' history. Gotta choose up sides in The Dunn Debate. Without going into too much detail, consider me one who would not be crestfallen if we moved him provided we got equal value in return.

The bullpen was bad both pre and post The Trade.

Any theory on how we could have improved the team that involves keeping Dave Williams is invalid on its' face.

Bottom line is that we just were not that good this year.

10-17-2006, 11:58 AM
Oh - BTW - still very glad the mgmt opted to leave Homer where he was.

10-17-2006, 11:58 AM

dfs - I appreciate the need to start this thread - and it's painful - but this could, in my opinion, get out of hand completely.

We would be rehashing the previous 500 pages of posts.

What do I know anyway, If I post in a thread, it seems to die quite soon after I post.


Roy Tucker
10-17-2006, 12:24 PM
If "ifs" and "buts" were candy and nuts, wouldn't it be a Merry Christmas?

They gave it their best shot. It wasn't good enough. C'est la vie.

Danny Serafini
10-17-2006, 12:45 PM
There are plenty of moves you can also look back on and say the Reds wouldn't have come within four games if they hadn't been made. Bottom line is, the team finished 80-82. No amount of second guessing is going to change those numbers in either direction.

10-17-2006, 02:07 PM
You want four games? Here's an 9 game swing. (assuming the games the Reds won were correctly won, yada yada yada)

Don't lose these games

4/16 vs St. Louis 8-7 http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/recap?gameId=260416124
5/20 vs Detroit 7-6 http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/recap?gameId=260520106
6/10 vs Chicago 4-2 http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/recap?gameId=260610117
6/12 vs Milwaukee 6-5 http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/recap?gameId=260612117
6/27 vs KC 9-8 http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/recap?gameId=260627117
7/3 vs Milwaukee 8-7 http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/recap?gameId=260703108
7/5 vs Milwaukee 6-5 http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/recap?gameId=260705108
8/11 vs Philladelphia 6-5 http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/recap?gameId=260811122

10-17-2006, 02:09 PM
Four blown saves?

Four blown saves would get you down to four innings. Four innings of mediocre work merely living up to minimum expectations for the job. That's how close.

Strikes Out Looking
10-17-2006, 08:00 PM
A few more innings of playing time for one EE, a couple of less innings pitched by one EM, and you are in the playoffs.

10-18-2006, 10:46 AM
I have the feeling that this is baseball. These games happen. Yes, they DEFINITELY could have been handled differently and I feel if we had any other manager, we could have won the central. But, had the Cards lost it, they would have had about 20 games to talk about that they 100% should have won. I think the Cards were the ones who almost blew it, not us. We stole so many victories from other teams this year.

How many times did we win that we shouldn't have come close to? Our run differential shows how lucky this team was.

10-18-2006, 10:55 AM
Reds record when I attend: 11-3 Someone in the Reds org needs to buy me season tickets ASAP.

Includes three walk-offs. Ross vs. Cards, Dunn vs. Indians, and LaRue vs. Padres. I either have great luck or I know how to pick em.

Also 1-0 in spring training.

Personally it is clear that if Avesice51 is able to work with a better ticket coach, cuts down on games missed and commits to truly winning games that the Reds will cruise in '07. Otherwise the Reds should look at trading him to Boston or maybe to Anaheim for Santana, Wood, Aybar, and Figgins.:) :)

10-18-2006, 02:20 PM
Jerry Narron's lineups and handing the ball far too many times to Elizardo, Michalak and Williams are your answer.

If you don't put the pieces in the right places, you'll never solve the puzzle. I wonder how Jerry Narron is at jigsaws....

10-18-2006, 02:25 PM
Personally it is clear that if Avesice51 is able to work with a better ticket coach, cuts down on games missed and commits to truly winning games that the Reds will cruise in '07. Otherwise the Reds should look at trading him to Boston or maybe to Anaheim for Santana, Wood, Aybar, and Figgins.:) :)

Nooooo. Don't trade me. I'm a Reds fan for life, unless someone hires me otherwise. ;)